IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v100y2012icp102-114.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fault diagnosis and comparing risk for the steel coil manufacturing process using statistical models for binary data

Author

Listed:
  • Debón, A.
  • Carlos Garcia-Díaz, J.

Abstract

Advanced statistical models can help industry to design more economical and rational investment plans. Fault detection and diagnosis is an important problem in continuous hot dip galvanizing. Increasingly stringent quality requirements in the automotive industry also require ongoing efforts in process control to make processes more robust. Robust methods for estimating the quality of galvanized steel coils are an important tool for the comprehensive monitoring of the performance of the manufacturing process. This study applies different statistical regression models: generalized linear models, generalized additive models and classification trees to estimate the quality of galvanized steel coils on the basis of short time histories. The data, consisting of 48 galvanized steel coils, was divided into sets of conforming and nonconforming coils. Five variables were selected for monitoring the process: steel strip velocity and four bath temperatures.

Suggested Citation

  • Debón, A. & Carlos Garcia-Díaz, J., 2012. "Fault diagnosis and comparing risk for the steel coil manufacturing process using statistical models for binary data," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 102-114.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:100:y:2012:i:c:p:102-114
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2011.12.022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832012000026
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2011.12.022?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Liu, Haibin & Davidson, Rachel A. & Apanasovich, Tatiyana V., 2008. "Spatial generalized linear mixed models of electric power outages due to hurricanes and ice storms," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 93(6), pages 897-912.
    2. Debón, A. & Carrión, A. & Cabrera, E. & Solano, H., 2010. "Comparing risk of failure models in water supply networks using ROC curves," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 43-48.
    3. G. V. Kass, 1980. "An Exploratory Technique for Investigating Large Quantities of Categorical Data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 29(2), pages 119-127, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Strobl, Carolin & Boulesteix, Anne-Laure & Augustin, Thomas, 2007. "Unbiased split selection for classification trees based on the Gini Index," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 483-501, September.
    2. Hache, Emmanuel & Leboullenger, Déborah & Mignon, Valérie, 2017. "Beyond average energy consumption in the French residential housing market: A household classification approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 82-95.
    3. Ghosh, Atish R. & Qureshi, Mahvash S. & Kim, Jun Il & Zalduendo, Juan, 2014. "Surges," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(2), pages 266-285.
      • Mahvash S Qureshi & Mr. Atish R. Ghosh & Mr. Juan Zalduendo & Mr. Jun I Kim, 2012. "Surges," IMF Working Papers 2012/022, International Monetary Fund.
    4. Tomàs Aluja-Banet & Eduard Nafria, 2003. "Stability and scalability in decision trees," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 505-520, September.
    5. I. Albarrán & P. Alonso-González & J. M. Marin, 2017. "Some criticism to a general model in Solvency II: an explanation from a clustering point of view," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1289-1308, June.
    6. Schwartz, Ira M. & York, Peter & Nowakowski-Sims, Eva & Ramos-Hernandez, Ana, 2017. "Predictive and prescriptive analytics, machine learning and child welfare risk assessment: The Broward County experience," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 309-320.
    7. Yousaf Muhammad & Dey Sandeep Kumar, 2022. "Best proxy to determine firm performance using financial ratios: A CHAID approach," Review of Economic Perspectives, Sciendo, vol. 22(3), pages 219-239, September.
    8. Ralf Elsner & Manfred Krafft & Arnd Huchzermeier, 2003. "Optimizing Rhenania's Mail-Order Business Through Dynamic Multilevel Modeling (DMLM)," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 50-66, February.
    9. Serrano-Cinca, Carlos & Gutiérrez-Nieto, Begoña & Bernate-Valbuena, Martha, 2019. "The use of accounting anomalies indicators to predict business failure," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 353-375.
    10. Osman Taylan & Abdulaziz S. Alkabaa & Mustafa Tahsin Yılmaz, 2022. "Impact of COVID-19 on G20 countries: analysis of economic recession using data mining approaches," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-30, December.
    11. Archana R. Panhalkar & Dharmpal D. Doye, 2020. "An approach of improving decision tree classifier using condensed informative data," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 47(4), pages 431-445, December.
    12. Dimitris N. Trakas & Mathaios Panteli & Nikos D. Hatziargyriou & Pierluigi Mancarella, 2019. "Spatial Risk Analysis of Power Systems Resilience During Extreme Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(1), pages 195-211, January.
    13. Bas Donkers & Richard Paap & Jedid‐Jah Jonker & Philip Hans Franses, 2006. "Deriving target selection rules from endogenously selected samples," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(5), pages 549-562, July.
    14. Hughes, William & Zhang, Wei & Cerrai, Diego & Bagtzoglou, Amvrossios & Wanik, David & Anagnostou, Emmanouil, 2022. "A Hybrid Physics-Based and Data-Driven Model for Power Distribution System Infrastructure Hardening and Outage Simulation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    15. Vicente-Cera, Isaías & Acevedo-Merino, Asunción & Nebot, Enrique & López-Ramírez, Juan Antonio, 2020. "Analyzing cruise ship itineraries patterns and vessels diversity in ports of the European maritime region: A hierarchical clustering approach," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    16. Edward Kozłowski & Anna Borucka & Andrzej Świderski & Przemysław Skoczyński, 2021. "Classification Trees in the Assessment of the Road–Railway Accidents Mortality," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-15, June.
    17. Javad Hassannataj Joloudari & Edris Hassannataj Joloudari & Hamid Saadatfar & Mohammad Ghasemigol & Seyyed Mohammad Razavi & Amir Mosavi & Narjes Nabipour & Shahaboddin Shamshirband & Laszlo Nadai, 2020. "Coronary Artery Disease Diagnosis; Ranking the Significant Features Using a Random Trees Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-24, January.
    18. Lea Piscitelli & Annalisa De Boni & Rocco Roma & Giovanni Ottomano Palmisano, 2023. "Carbon Farming: How to Support Farmers in Choosing the Best Management Strategies for Low-Impact Food Production," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    19. van Riessen, B. & Negenborn, R.R. & Dekker, R., 2016. "Real-time Container Transport Planning with Decision Trees based on Offline Obtained Optimal Solutions," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI2016-14, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
    20. Coolen, Frank P.A. & Coolen-Maturi, Tahani, 2015. "Predictive inference for system reliability after common-cause component failures," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 27-33.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:100:y:2012:i:c:p:102-114. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.